Why Is Resting/Injuries and Maybe Even Supplies, Still In At All?

[whiskiz]

We all get how per encounter is much better than per rest, as per rest makes it hard to balance the combat and creates challenge via severely restricting your gameplay needlessly.

 

So the game shifted to per encounter but there still appears to remnants of per rest, but just as pointless and tedious as PoE 1 from what i've gathered so far, while waiting to get the game when it's been finished properly (mostly balancing.)

 

Apparently you just get a few rando injuries and then you go and rest. I don't see what this adds to gameplay - the mechanic seems to be made as casual as in 1, so again just making it nothing more than pointless tedium.

 

So why wasn't this weird, half-done thing removed entirely? Was the shell of the mechanic left in for the few willfully ignorant die-hard fans of attrition based gameplay? If so, i doubt it's casual implementation does anything at all for them and certainly nothing for anyone else, so i wonder why else they'd still have it. The only other reason i can think of is "because nod to oldschool RPG games" and that's not a very good reason either.

 

I get attrition based gameplay, i just didn't like the PoE casual implementation of it - again making it nothing more than pointless tedium, so i'm just wondering why if they aren't willing to expand on it, why they leave a ghost of the mechanic in instead of removing it entirely.

 

Why they didn't either expand upon it or remove it entirely.

 

Anyone else able to lend some insight as to their thought process when it comes to the rest mechanic?

Edited May 22, 2018 by whiskiz

[Crucis]

We all get how per encounter is much better than per rest, as per rest makes it hard to balance the combat and creates challenge via severely restricting your gameplay needlessly.

 

So the game shifted to per encounter but there still appears to remnants of per rest, but just as pointless and tedious as PoE 1 from what i've gathered so far, while waiting to get the game when it's been finished properly (mostly balancing.)

 

Apparently you just get a few rando injuries and then you rest and the mechanic seems to be made as casual as in 1, so again just making it nothing more than pointless tedium.

 

So why wasn't this weird, half-done, pointless and tedious thing removed entirely? Was the shell of the mechanic left in for the few willfully ignorant die-hard fans of attrition based gameplay? If so, i doubt it's casual implementation does anything at all for them and certainly nothing for anyone else, so i wonder why else they'd still have it. The only other reason i can think of is "because nod to oldschool RPG games" and that's not a very good reason either.

 

I get attrition based gameplay, i just didn't like the PoE casual implementation of it - again making it nothing more than pointless tedium, so i'm just wondering why if they aren't willing to expand on it, why they leave a ghost of the mechanic in, instead of removing it entirely.

 

Anyone else able to lend some insight?

 

 

I have to disagree.  I do not agree that per encounter is "much better" than per rest.  I don't even agree that it's better at all.  I think that per encounter reduces the challenge of limiting your spell use properly so that you can go as far as possible on one rest.

 

I also think that resting needs to be in the game even more than it is now.  It's ridiculous to recognize diurnal cycles without recognizing that the characters should have to live according to them as well.  Parties should absolutely need to rest, at least once per day or have an increasing amount of fatigue reduce their capabilities. 

 

I don't know  what you mean by attrition based game play.   But if you mean the need to manage one's resources, then I think that you're wrong and are essentially advocating a very lazy style of gaming.

[Wormerine]

Tradition. Rest has been part of table top D&D. IE imported this system even though they didn’t find a way to properly impliment it/enforce it. PoE1 iterated on the system, trying to encourage right rest distribution via limited camping supplies. In Deadfire they got rid of it altogether, except the token injury and empowerment system. It’s there, because it is expected to be there, but has little influence on overall gameplay. The positive aspect of injury system as getting someone knocked out is undesired. I do like it more than KOTORs complete lack of consequence. However, money and food are easy to come by, so the ”punishment” is more psychological than mechanical. In that aspect it is similar to PoE1, however, if you do play poorly it wastes less of your time, and doesn’t encourage you to not use tools at your disposal.

Edited May 22, 2018 by Wormerine

[Yenkaz]

I actually liked the POE system mostly because it gave more of an "we're a actually exploring and should visit the Inn now that we're in town anyway." feeling.

 

I don't mind so much when sailing, obviously you're supposedly sleeping in teams so fatigue there wouldn't make sense.

Edited May 22, 2018 by Yenkaz

[whiskiz]

Tradition. Rest has been part of table top D&D. IE imported this system even though they didn’t find a way to properly impliment it/enforce it. PoE1 iterated on the system, trying to encourage right rest distribution via limited camping supplies. In Deadfire they got rid of it altogether, except the token injury and empowerment system. It’s there, because it is expected to be there, but has little influence on overall gameplay. The positive aspect of injury system as getting someone knocked out is undesired. I do like it more than KOTORs complete lack of consequence. However, money and food are easy to come by, so the ”punishment” is more psychological than mechanical. In that aspect it is similar to PoE1, however, if you do play poorly it wastes less of your time, and doesn’t encourage you to not use tools at your disposal.

 

Ah so it is mainly "cause tradition" or "cause this is what they do" i figured as much.

 

You would think they would then flesh it out more, make it more than just some pointless tedium, if they have to have it because "unwritten dnd RPG rule"

 

"I think that per encounter reduces the challenge of limiting your spell use properly so that you can go as far as possible on one rest."

 

It does do that, it removes that challenge entirely - replacing it with a challenge that's easier/better to balance, not needlessly restrictive, not pointless and/or tedious and so a much healthier and fun game design - per encounter.

 

The actual combat becomes the challenge (when they get round to balancing it post-release..) where every fight is a big fight, instead of it just being about how well you can hoard and restrict yourself from the gameplay (lol) auto-attacking the majority of combat on "trash mobs" while saving and using the big stuff to roll the big fights, before resting and repeating.

 

It's going to be great.

Edited May 22, 2018 by whiskiz

[gloomseeker]

Having to rest every two minutes doesn't make the game better/harder or more interesting.

 

Not having to rest at all simply makes the whole thing inconsequential. 

 

There is a balance to be found.

 

Resting in the first Pillars was either pointless (plenty of camping supplies around) or a chore (going back to Caed Nua or Stalwart for some stat bonuses) whereas in Deadfire it's certainly much less of a hassle and a way to make use of food items. 

[JFutral]

I'm agnostic about the whole thing. I do like this implementation vs PoE 1. I rarely feel like I have to rest. In PoE 1 it was necessary to stay up to snuff against anything that might come (for the first play through or two) or (later after I learned the whole game) just when I knew it was going to be important.

 

I like not needing camping supplies. The Food screen needs a slight UI tweak o two (too big, it wasn't clear the first time through what it was for, and how to select food for each character needs a bit of help). But I do like this implementation of resting.

 

Although, with resting an intrinsic part of PoE, I am still baffled how I can go so long without resting. Some kind of resting is obviously implied but never articulated. I think. I mean, I don't really think my party actually goes for days without sleep. I could be wrong. I also still don't understand undead being affected by Cipher skills or similar spells.

 

But I accept it as part of the narrative of the game.

 

Personally, I think traps are more superfluous and pointless than resting in PoE. But, tradition, as Wormerine says.

 

Joe

[evilcat]

I generally like per encounter, since that saves me watching loadings screans. If i wanted to look at them there is probably clip on YT for that.

 

However there is some benefit of picking specific buff from resting, either by food, or tavern. Some of them are very useful.

Also plot device, when we speak with companions after the night.

[IndiraLightfoot]

I do like this implementation vs PoE 1. I rarely feel like I have to rest. In PoE 1 it was necessary to stay up to snuff against anything that might come (for the first play through or two) or (later after I learned the whole game) just when I knew it was going to be important.

 

I like not needing camping supplies. The Food screen needs a slight UI tweak o two (too big, it wasn't clear the first time through what it was for, and how to select food for each character needs a bit of help). But I do like this implementation of resting.

 

Although, with resting an intrinsic part of PoE, I am still baffled how I can go so long without resting. Some kind of resting is obviously implied but never articulated. I think. I mean, I don't really think my party actually goes for days without sleep. I could be wrong. I also still don't understand undead being affected by Cipher skills or similar spells.

 

 

Personally, I think traps are more superfluous and pointless than resting in PoE.

 

Joe

I agree with the above to a tee!

 

I've rested like 5 times outside Neketaka in nearly 60h of PotD gameplay, and twice at some inn. IIRC, my in-game time is now nearly 4 months!!

My party should be dead from sleep deprivation a long time ago.

 

I do enjoy the food system as an idea - it's easily much better than the boring camping supplies - and traps, yeah, I just chuck them in the stash and sell them when I feel like it.

[Elerond]

Resting is there to put small limit in some powerful abilities like empower.

 

It and injuries are also used to increase danger level bit as it means that playing carelessly will cause your people become injured which first weakens them and if they get 4 injuries they die.

 

Resting and food is used for long time bonuses, which gives you strategic option which can help you overcome difficult fights. Like for example there are foods that give you immunities, which are very nice when you fight against enemies like fampyrs, which are much easier to kill when they can't dominate your party members. Also because foods that give you best bonuses are rarer and more expensive you usually want to be bit more careful in fights so that you don't need to rest and lose those bonuses.

 

Injuries also put some risk in scripted encounters as failing test in May injured and even kill your party members.

[algroth]

Injuries do place certain limits on the party I suppose, the likes of being unable to permanently raise your tank for example, and offer a consequence to getting your characters knocked out (I do think a consequence of some kind is necessary myself); but for the most part I'm finding myself often playing with an injury or two atop my party until I effectively need to rest, *not* because I need to heal or recover spent abilities or whatnot but because of the buffs resting can give, and I'm... Okay with that. I don't mind resting as a way to grant some hefty and extended buffs to your party.

Edited May 22, 2018 by algroth

[IndiraLightfoot]

I just want to add that I play on if characters in my party has 1 injury, and even when one has 2 for a single fight, and only then, I will consider resting (often I have just pressed on). That is cool in its own right.

[Tomice]

The new system certainly has it's merits, but I would  expand upon it:

- Food only gives it's bonus for 16 hours, followed by 8 hours without buff or penalty

- After 24 hours without rest, penalties apply

- every party member NEEDS to eat at least hardtack

- The resting bonus from taverns can be combined with food

 

This would make it much more realistic, interesting and meaningful. Plus the dev's love having money sinks!

 

To further improve immersion, party members should NEED to eat food, while alcoholic beverages are optional. They provide both benefits and disadvantages however, making them more situational than food.

[rjshae]

The rest-like mechanic is a resource management element. You could abstract away virtually every element of the game, but the more you do so, the less it feels like the PnP role-playing experience. I'd rather have some obstacles in there like resource management to feel like I'm getting a challenge. In fact I'd have preferred to see more of that in PoE; the game system caters to the lazy IMO.

[Crucis]

 

Tradition. Rest has been part of table top D&D. IE imported this system even though they didn’t find a way to properly impliment it/enforce it. PoE1 iterated on the system, trying to encourage right rest distribution via limited camping supplies. In Deadfire they got rid of it altogether, except the token injury and empowerment system. It’s there, because it is expected to be there, but has little influence on overall gameplay. The positive aspect of injury system as getting someone knocked out is undesired. I do like it more than KOTORs complete lack of consequence. However, money and food are easy to come by, so the ”punishment” is more psychological than mechanical. In that aspect it is similar to PoE1, however, if you do play poorly it wastes less of your time, and doesn’t encourage you to not use tools at your disposal.

 

Ah so it is mainly "cause tradition" or "cause this is what they do" i figured as much.

 

You would think they would then flesh it out more, make it more than just some pointless tedium, if they have to have it because "unwritten dnd RPG rule"

 

"I think that per encounter reduces the challenge of limiting your spell use properly so that you can go as far as possible on one rest."

 

 

 

It does do that, it removes that challenge entirely - replacing it with a challenge that's easier/better to balance, not needlessly restrictive, not pointless and/or tedious and so a much healthier and fun game design - per encounter.

 

The actual combat becomes the challenge (when they get round to balancing it post-release..) where every fight is a big fight, instead of it just being about how well you can hoard and restrict yourself from the gameplay (lol) auto-attacking the majority of combat on "trash mobs" while saving and using the big stuff to roll the big fights, before resting and repeating.

 

It's going to be great.

 

 

I completely disagree.  I think that you're advocating a very lazy play style.

[Crucis]

The rest-like mechanic is a resource management element. You could abstract away virtually every element of the game, but the more you do so, the less it feels like the PnP role-playing experience. I'd rather have some obstacles in there like resource management to feel like I'm getting a challenge. In fact I'd have preferred to see more of that in PoE; the game system caters to the lazy IMO.

 

Bingo!

 

I personally don't feel the need for every little detail to be part of the  game.  But, dammit, resting on a regular basis due to character fatigue should be!

 

I could have probably done without the having to deal with food and drink for the crew of your ship thing, but it doesn't really bother me much either.

 

I guess that I find all this lazy play style crap to be annoying.  It makes me wonder if those doing the complaining about it grew up being mostly game console players rather than computer and PnP gamers, because from my experience PnP and computer games have a greater desire and tolerance for detail than console gamers who seem to want everything dumbed down to an arcade level of play.

[Crucis]

I just want to add that I play on if characters in my party has 1 injury, and even when one has 2 for a single fight, and only then, I will consider resting (often I have just pressed on). That is cool in its own right.

 

I generally agree, Indira.  Though one thing you really have to watch out for in a party with characters who can cast any sort of revival spell is if you have AI enabled, you can risk having an injured character  get knocked out multiple times when sometimes it might just be better to leave them knocked out and safe from multiple knockouts in a tough that risk death.  I've had the AI revive a character who was knocked out in the middle of a mob of enemies, and then had that character proceed to get quickly knocked out a second time.

 

I'm doing pretty much the same as you.  I'm willing to push on with a single injury, but once someone takes a second one, it's time to fall back and rest.  Also, I watch for characters having some sort of annoying curse on them.  I'll usually rest to get rid of those.

[cokane]

...

 

The actual combat becomes the challenge (when they get round to balancing it post-release..) where every fight is a big fight, instead of it just being about how well you can hoard and restrict yourself from the gameplay (lol) auto-attacking the majority of combat on "trash mobs" while saving and using the big stuff to roll the big fights, before resting and repeating.

 

It's going to be great.

 

 

"Where every fight is a big fight" put another way "where every fight is the same". That does not sound like a good recipe for a lengthy, open-world RPG.

[Boeroer]

We all get how per encounter is much better than per rest

Please speak only for yourself.

[lMarcusl]

I agree with the OP that it's a relic from the olden days. The game should decide. It should have done so in PoE1, but as someone who really only got into cRPGs with that game (didn't play Planescape or Baldur's Gate), I'm kinda glad they left it in just so I have some understanding of how meaningless the system is (granted, it took 3 playthroughs and the perspective of having played PoE2). Injuries have no consequence. They are no limitation upon anything you do. You press a button, feed your guys some random stale piece of bread you got lying around and BAM, that broken knee, concussion and acid burn is history. The system doesn't even have the common decency to waste my time with 5 minute load screens (jk). You push a button and everything is solved, using the exceedingly rare resource of food...that you have in piles of like 500 on your ship, because the stuff you use to clear the critical result of failure in combat, for some reason, comes from the same resource pool that you are expected to consume by the hundreds. O-ok.

There are two ways to go and currently the game does neither. Either the system should be scrapped. Take per rest abilies and empower with it for all I care. I've used empower maybe twice in the whole Veteran campaign and more out of curiosity rather than need. Not having that resource refill would mean taking more care when and where you use your resources in tougher fights, and I don't think having an ability be 10 power levels higher is a healthy solution to any problem. Other than that, most per rest abilities tend to be irrelevant considering the amount of abilities you have access to on per encounter basis. I'm pretty sure I haven't used a single Watcher-only ability in my PoE2 playthrough and they were an afterthought in PoE1 as well for me. Out of all the systems the game offers you to play with, even traps tend to get more use in my playthroughs than Watcher abilities. And that's saying something.

 

Alternatively, make the resting system matter. Don't make it a one click cure all. Make characters rest, by all means. But make it have impact. Force the character to sit out the next couple of quests if they have an injury (following the old "stronghold turn" system from PoE1 for instance, so you can't bypass it by waiting). Make the player shuffle up a party composition, try new stuff, new gear, new abilities, adapt to changing circumstances. Getting someone injured would suddenly be a thing you care about instead of a meaningless, minor resource dump. It would draw on another resource the game never uses, that being your character roster (how often do you really reach into your character roster unless you're completing a companion quest? my parties stay the same from start to finish outside of that). And it would be a different thing to different people. Some would try to avoid injuries at all costs, making combat more tense, while others might actually welcome the incentive to try a new party composition, and wouldn't mind injuries at all. And for those who fall in neither camp, nothing stops you from creating a custom back-up character just in case your Mechanics guy ends up with an ouchie on his face.

 

I'd much prefer the game commits rather than trivialise the already trivial system even further.

Edited May 22, 2018 by lMarcusl

[Starwars]

 

...

 

The actual combat becomes the challenge (when they get round to balancing it post-release..) where every fight is a big fight, instead of it just being about how well you can hoard and restrict yourself from the gameplay (lol) auto-attacking the majority of combat on "trash mobs" while saving and using the big stuff to roll the big fights, before resting and repeating.

 

It's going to be great.

 

 

"Where every fight is a big fight" put another way "where every fight is the same". That does not sound like a good recipe for a lengthy, open-world RPG.

 

 

I don't necessarily agree that "every fight would be the same" but I still agree with the overall sentiment. I like per-rest stuff because I find it makes the game... breathe a bit, things change overheard depending on what the player does and how well he does, when he decides to rest and what resources he uses etc.

The notion that every battle can be balanced easier because of per-encounter mechanics sounds really... well, mechanical and controlled to me.

 

I find a "strategy layer" that is in place above the combat encounters work really well to make RPGs like these feel a bit more... I don't know, interesting in the way they unfold. Which is why I'm extremely glad that we have the ship rations and all that. It's not that it's particularly difficult (just like managing rest resources in PoE1 wasn't difficult), but it just adds another level to the game so that it doesn't literally feel like you're just moving from one combat encounter to another.

 

But yeah, different players will react differently I suppose. I have never been one to abuse rest mechanics in games, and I couldn't stand the idea of returning to town every 5 seconds in Pillars1 (like some people apparently did). But in this game, I cast the same broken spells over and over again, and completely break encounters because there is no reason not to.

 

With Deadfire being so much about travel in a way I would've *loved* to see them push the per-rest stuff much further and I was disappointed to learn that they went the per-encounter route instead.

Edited May 22, 2018 by Starwars

[Volourn]

"We all get how per encounter is much better than per rest"

 

No. It's worse. 100% worse. All it means is I use the same strategy every fight. Delayed Fireball fireball fireball. BOOM anything not immune to fire is dead.Per encounter means every fight has to be balanced for a maxed out party with access to their best abilities.

 

Per rest is so much better. It would be even better if people didn't spam rest but that is on people. I try not to rest while on a 'dungeon crawl' personally. Makes the game more fun and challenging combat wise.

Edited May 22, 2018 by Volourn

[whiskiz]

 

We all get how per encounter is much better than per rest

Please speak only for yourself.

 

 

Actually i guess i do speak for most people, according to both common sense when comparing combat systems and the second comment in this thread: 

 

https://forums.obsidian.net/topic/100420-admirable-design-decisions/

 

And you know, the devs too, having been the ones that changed the combat system.

 

 

"Where every fight is a big fight" put another way "where every fight is the same"

 

Yeah because auto attacking 80% of the game and having "trash mobs" for the majority of combat totally didn't make most fights the same. Using mostly low stuff then the same big things on the same big fights was totally not the same either.

 

But you're right - it would make every fight the same - except for you know, the different offense/defense stats you need to work with each fight (reflex/deflection/resolve/will), the different phys damage and armor types, different mag damage and armor types, target priority (melee/ranged/caster) and positioning as well as the awesome depth and variety of subclass + multiclass and extended pure class and debuffs/buffs/DoTs/healing, concentration/interruption and priorities of whatever else, that varies from fight to fight.

 

But aside from those minor things, every fight would totally be the same just because they're all challenging.

 

More of the afore mentioned "willfully ignorant die-hard fans of attrition based gameplay" from my original post. Too nostalgia-driven and stuck in the past, having been brought up on IE and DnD, if we're being honest.

 

And if you can't handle proper challenge, if you need to resort to an archaic system where you can just save your big stuff to blow on anything with a semblance of challenge that comes along once in awhile, instead of being challenged every fight - maybe you should just play on lower difficulties. That's what they're there for.

 

 

"the game system caters to the lazy"

 

You call it lazy, i call it not wanting the challenge to come from being restricted from the gameplay, which also makes it harder to balance and just being able to save big stuff for big fights to faceroll. Wanting more than just 80% of the game be AFK "trash mobs" then "blow everything and win" then rest, rinse and repeat.

 

I guess we're weird like that.

Edited May 22, 2018 by whiskiz

[cokane]

....

"Where every fight is a big fight" put another way "where every fight is the same"

 

Yeah because auto attacking 80% of the game and having "trash mobs" for the majority of combat totally didn't make most fights the same. Using mostly low stuff then the same big things on the same big fights was totally not the same either.

 

But you're right - it would make every fight the same - except for you know, the different offense/defense stats you need to work with each fight (reflex/deflection/resolve/will), the different phys damage and armor types, different mag damage and armor types, target priority (melee/ranged/caster) and positioning as well as the awesome depth and variety of subclass + multiclass and extended pure class and debuffs/buffs/DoTs/healing, concentration/interruption and priorities of whatever else, that varies from fight to fight.

 

But aside from those minor things, every fight is totally the same just because they're all challenging.

 

More of the afore mentioned "willfully ignorant die-hard fans of attrition based gameplay" from my original post.

 

If you can't handle proper challenge, if you need to resort to an archaic system where you can just save your big stuff to blow on anything with a semblance of challenge, instead of being challenged every fight - maybe you should just play on lower difficulties.

 

 

"the game system caters to the lazy"

 

You call it lazy, i call it not wanting challenge to come from being restricted from the gameplay and just being able to save big stuff for big fights to faceroll. I guess we're weird like that.

 

 

I do not feel like this is an accurate characterization of how combats went down in PoE1 at all. I also think it might hint at why some of the same players on this board seem to rely on two criticisms of the original game.

 

1. "80% of the game" was auto attack fights.

2. Limited camping meant you had to go back to town alot.

 

These things are related, and I think they demonstrate that certain players are simply not interested in exploring the wealth of options for optimizing your gameplay in the original. It's simply not true that 80% of the fights in PoE1 were just attack-move fights. It's likely not even 50%. Most fights and most areas actually wanted you to use SOME spells and SOME per encounter abilities in nearly every single fight. Yes there were a few lone trolls or lone shadows, but those were there to introduce monsters to the player.

 

The Temple of Eothas below the first town is a perfect example of this. It doesn't actually have "the big fight where you blow all your abilities" instead it has a series of fights that, if done strategically and with SOME spell usage in EACH fight, allow the player to coast through the dungeon without needing to go back to town. Instead of just casting the same max abilities you use in every fight, you are judicious and focus on specific casts, i.e. fire damage for the spirits. But, if you just attack-moved every fight, yeah, you would run out of health very quickly.

 

If folks were just auto-attacking for 80% of the fights in the original game, it's no wonder that those same folks had to go back to town regularly due to limited resting supplies.

Edited May 22, 2018 by cokane

[Guest 4ward]

we‘ve had this discussion many times before. I still stand firmly on my opnion that per-rest is better because the best balance is the balance and difficulty the player sets for himself since we all play different. An rtwp videogame is not a chess game where there‘s firm rules and both sides start at same odds. Rather, the player is always at an advantage. The player will always make better use of crowd control, pause the game, have better initial positioning and move better around, do surprising things like retreat which enemy AI doesn‘t understand. If on top you give the player per-encounter + empower then it‘s clear that the enemy can‘t go against it. The only way is to up the enemy numbers which boarding battles have but i don‘t consider that interesting. A good example is the pyramide dungeon (sanctum it‘s called i think) where in one room the player fights against three waves of ghosts/spirits which i don‘t find interesting because it‘s exhausting. Yet in one of the other rooms nearby i‘m against spores who charmed Aloth so i had to charm him back which is much more interesting. Now, in per-rest if i didn‘t have charm i would have had to think of something else, i‘d have like e.g. cast withdraw on Aloth. You‘re doing things different you see. It‘s a pity that they went away from long-term fatigueness and per-rest IMO. Perhaps, there was a chance to go per-rest in this game if there were less islands but bigger and with more content so that they were like dungeons and anchoring points the entrance to them, dunno...